JPG40504 wrote:
Sad you have given up on the system.
This may just be semantics, but I haven't given up on the system. I've given up on trying to get the people back
in to the system. The American voting public has been disenfranchised through apathy. The system IS NOT BROKEN. Those who have assumed control of that system choose to use it for their own gain. That gives the allusion (not illusion) of being faulty or broken. The illusion is by those running it who see it as working well. How the citizens of this nation might change the perception of the elected... I honestly don't know. If a person thinks that their excrement has no offensive odor and those they listen to, prolong and encourage that myth (probably because they have odors they choose to ignore!), then they will ignore the screams of the masses are heresy or at a minimum lunacy.
A Republic is a grand and glorious form of governing. We ask a person to take all our diverse ideas and try and coalesce them into something meaningful for MOST, though not ALL. The massive digression (IMHO) comes when we allow NON-ELECTED organizations to fight for control and control the fight of our duly elected representative. The most serious grievance (again IMHO) is that those non-elected entities have no rules.
How we lost so many things.
1. The Supreme Court recently ruled that companies are a voting voice, with rights the same as any individual citizen. That was cloaked in First Amendment rhetoric, but none the less, any entity with deep enough pockets can do as they wish in any election. That means that China can buy a majority of a grocery chain (which they are currently doing) and through that chain may legally fund as much money as they want into a campaign.
2. Political parties (not necessarily the politicians) have crawled into bed with entities that can give them the financial strength they crave. You no longer hear about how many supporters a candidate might have, but rather how much money they have in their campaign war chest.
3. Political Action Committees have succeeded in creating more apathy and animosity among voters by creating so many HATE ads, that voters tune out the ads. The reason behind this (once again IMHO) is so that the voting public does not want to ask questions. Creating an environment where people say "Just get the election over with so we can get back to our lives!!" The media LOVES this approach. They sell advertisements in much greater quantities than in an happy and cordial contest. Reporters have no need to ever pose pointed and relevant questions to the candidates, thereby robbing the voters of a chance to ask meaningful questions.
blah blah blah ad nauseum!
I could probably go on with this for pages. The view inside is frightening and eye opening.
So, on to some solutions.
1. All political parties and PACs MUST provide a certified list of all donors giving more than $100 and the amount given. It is required by each organization to publish (in local papers and electronically) that list each week.
This allows voters to see who is supporting each candidate and by requiring weekly updates, huge sums cannot be gathered without public knowledge. And yes, there will be those that try to sneak large amounts in that last week, but cheaters will always try to cheat.
2. No political party nor PAC may donate ANYTHING to ANY person running for office until after the primary election.
It levels the playing field a bit more than currently exists. An agenda driven organization cannot force their candidate to the front just by providing huge amounts of media advertising and this severely limits mud slinging .
3. No candidate for public office at a local or state level (with an exception being Governor) may raise or spend more than that person would receive in base salary for the term of office.
Without BIG money as backing, more candidates can afford to test the waters which may mean a greater and hopefully more diverse group from which to choose.
Those who want to scream that the above violates First Amendment rights, I would counter with.
"Though neither of us were alive when the founding fathers were creating the blueprint of this nation, I sincerely doubt that the designated idea and ideals of that amendment were to mean he (or she) with the largest amount of money gets to shout longer and louder than any of the rest, but instead meant that EVERYONE should receive a chance to speak.
But then again, that's just the opinion of one crazy person.
So JPG, though your happiness and by it's consequence, your sadness is not my responsibility, I will readily admit that I am sad myself at myself. Maybe if I ever get healthy enough to go fight the fight again, I'll enter in to the fray. Until then it is my fervent hope that the generation that I see as a hope does not become so disenchanted and feel so disenfranchised that they abandon the system in favor of self gratification as an end all. After all, though system is currently run by morally questionable and ethically abandoned (or at a minimum challenged), the SYSTEM is a GREAT one.
So to the topic. If representatives were respectful of the electorate they might vote more in favor of that electorate instead of voting for which entity will further line their pockets. That is not to say that COLAs, Medicare, Social Security, Unemployment, Military spending and all the rest would not be reduced, rearranged or possibly eliminated. It
would mean that the duly elected representative was acting at the behest and on the behalf of his and or her constituents. Novel concept!!
Be well,
Ben
How about "Made in the USA". Is anyone else worried that we don't make as much stuff here anymore? How much is imported and what we owe other countries. If the China bill collector came demanding us to pay up, they could probably own us without firing a shot. How about making stuff here, by the people getting the free ride and get back some of the pride we used to have.